is there a tag for luggage lockers at bicycle parking facilities that can also be used to charge e-bike batteries? I attached a photo of such lockers. They are small and meant for things like helmets but also specifically for e-bike batteries (hence the cable-plug-icon on each locker). Of course it’s not free: in the case below, you must have a rental contract to use them.
I searched the wiki and this forum but found nothing. Only the locker=* tag is somewhat what I want, but it’s undocumented and doesn’t cover battery charging, fees, etc. If there’s no tagging for such things, I might start a proposal.
I’d be inclined to think such things as luggage lockers ** are already mapped at railway station… have a look there. For bike charging map a node as charging station.
Edit **: Well certainly no object tags hinting at this, few as a feature tag of something else.
Regardless whether or not tram/subway/train/bus stations have tags for those locker-things (which they don’t in the above example), it’s IMHO clearly a property of the bicycle parking facility. The lockers are not only meant for charging, so it’s not a charging station. For me, it’s a locker, that also has charging capabilities for batteries that fit inside.
Well, I recently came past an avant-garde 4 seat bench that had 220V sockets, so that’s what I added, not necessarily for bikes, one can charge your phone or sit and work on the laptop. A Stop & Go bike toolstand recently placed here had 2 sockets… In Rapino there’s a stand with 2 heavy duty 220v sockets. You need to push a button for few seconds and then the thing will charge for an hour. All for free, all of these bring your own charger. Maybe something like socket:220V=yes, no hit I had on TagInfo but they having been appearing all over the place here.
There’s always debate to map as separate node or as a feature of something. Whether cycle progs have a nose for them I don’t know.
Edit: Come to think the city here installed 10 4 spot covered charging stations for e-bike only with little lockers holding the charging cable where you can stick a device in for simultaneous charging. Over 1 year of operation and never ever seen a private e-bike charging there, but they have a secure bike locking system to slide steering bar in so your bike wont be ripped and that’s what peeps have been using them for to park their regular street bikes. No signs saying that non-ebike will be removed.
If there’s no tagging for such things, I might start a proposal.
I am not sure if something appropriate exists but I agree we should be able to map lockers which offer device charging (also seen this for mobile phones and laptops on camp sites and beach resorts)
Not necessarily. You will find such small locker boxes with charging device also in places without a designated bicycle parking area*. Again it is a separate object so I think it should get it’s own amenity tag.
Imo the first question is: Is the primary purpose a locker for bike equipment (or small luggage) and the secondary purpose the charging facility or vice versa? Depending upon that an option would be
amenity=luggage_locker + additional tags for the charging facility
or amenity=charging_station (+charging details) + additional tag for the storage box
Only in case this locker charger boxes are seen as a completely different device, neither a luggage locker nor a charging station, but something special only for bicycle users like
“bicycle equipment storage box including power connection”
we should go for a completey new amenity tag imo. In this case we should consider that these boxes allow charging of other devices than bike batteries also, like @dieterdreist already pointed out.
Just an observation: that would probably be better amenity=locker (yes the amenity=luggage_locker vs amenity=locker schism is silly, but unlikely to go away).
Thanks for all the input. I think this is a topic for a proposal as no tagging schema currently exists. Since there are two cases (lockers with and without amenity they belong to), I think something like this would do the trick, wouldn’t it?
1. Case:
There is some amenity (bus stop, bicycle parking, campsite, …) which has lockers that directly belong to it. The lockers are close to the amenity, so that the whole thing is considered one POI.
In this case I think something like locker=yes (already exists in the wiki) + locker:capacity=* + locker:capacity:charging=* + locker:fee=* + locker:... would be an option.
2. Case:
The locker exists separately or cannot be assigned to one amenity nearby. In this case I think amenity=locker (or =luggage_locker if it’s in fact a luggage locker) + capacity:charging=* + fee=* + … would be an option.
I think we should prefer mapping things as proper features and map their relationship with other features preferably spatially (one inside the other) where possible. As a shortcut or in certain cases (less detailed mapping), a property could be added to a POI (e.g. when the POI is mapped as a node, or if you don’t know the position of the contained feature), but it should be considered inferior.
I agree to what @dieterdreist has already written. A minor item like a waste_basket or a bench inside a public transport shelter may be tagged as properties of the latter but in general separate physical objects should be mapped as separate data objects.
Those locker boxes are well worth to be separately tagged so I would not support the 1. Case.
In view of the 2. Case: Considering that these lockers are neither real luggage lockers nor simple charging stations I would vote for a new tag, something like
amenity=charging_locker
completed by additional tags like capacity, fee, socket_type and the like.
Charging_locker is precise enough to describe the purpose of these kind of object and generic enough to include charging of other devices than just bike batteries.
The proposal is abandoned and I’d say a device charging station without locker boxes is just an amenity=charging_station which could be further refined for charging phones, notebooks and the like. No need for a specific amenity tag imho.
Yes, that is what I would be going for: charging_locker.
I also think a completely new top-level amenity tag is not needed here. At least not for my initial problem, which is a locker where you can (but don’t have to) charge batteries or your phone or whatever. I personally don’t have an e-bike but would still be able to use the lockers as normal lockers and put my helmet in it.
I think a charging station where you can (but maybe don’t have to) lock your device is a different story. But we already have amenity=device_charging_station + lockable=* according to the wiki.
Regarding the question whether or not to create a separate feature for my lockers: IMHO it depends. When mapping a but stop shelter as way, I don’t add the bench within the shelter way as node, but I tag the way with bench=yes. So it’s not uncommon in OSM to add multiple objects as one combined feature, because the separate objects are spatially very close to each other and, furthermore, belong together.
